Comments on: Clean up Washington: mission impossible? Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: Andreea Fri, 20 Feb 2009 13:34:19 +0000 Who knows what Obama is capabile of? He managed to launch another rescue plan in a such short time.. He already had the analisys, but I think he will manage somehow to fix a few problems in a few years.

By: David Johns Wed, 18 Feb 2009 03:17:15 +0000 If Kaiser is correct, and I believe he is, the only way to end the corruption, or at least curb it, is to deal with the rising cost of running for office and the constant stumping and fundraising elected officials must do. Instead of passing ridiculous campaign finance laws like McCain-Fiengold, we need to pass term limits. We have term limits for the president, why not for the congress?

By: Abel Tsegga Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:42:37 +0000 The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.

$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$550 billion: U.S. Defense budget

By: Bill Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:48:10 +0000 Corruption in Washington stems from votes being bought.
I would think that’s one thing we could probably agree on.

During the last election, I recall reading an article detailing the contributions from major organizations. One of the big Wall Street investment firms had split their millions nearly evenly between Republication & Democrat (obviously a case of supporting the best government money can buy)!

With TARP1 and TARP2 it has become evident that those investments are paying dividends. In fact, look at our new (tax cheating) Treasury Secretary. Definitively part of the status quo that got us into this mess, yet Obama picked this insider of the financial oligarchy. And his first major initiative, proposing a Trillion more to protect the share/bond holders & richly payed execs of the major banks.

That money will come out of yours & mine pockets.

By: jjmk4546 Sun, 15 Feb 2009 04:57:22 +0000 15 Feb 2009 Talking about Larry Bang’s post 14 Feb
7:50PM ALL these politicians SEEM to be on the take and
on the make. See following link
Now the terrorist master Pakistan is saying it is
threatened by al-queda and taliban terrorists !
Do reuters readers think it is just a kind of scare-
mongering so that this foolish nation i.e US will give
billions to Zardari’s pakistan ( while previous billions were given to Musharaf’s pakistan; After all, now it seems to be Zardars’s luck) , to counter al-queda and taliban. man, get the f out of here; leave we poor people alone. But think of it: It’s ALL on the paper
which US keeps printing that gives US people almost everything cars,TV,airplanes,booze etc free without worr-
ying about work. Do you think now it is Obama and Clinton

By: Larry Bangs Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:50:25 +0000 I believe you are seriously underestimating President Obama. But get in line behind Hillary Clinton, John McCain and the Republican party.

You point to Daschle as an example but you are mistaken if you think Daschle stepped aside because of tax concerns. It was precisely because he made $5MM “selling” influence and access even if he was not a registered lobbyist that led to his withdrawal. As for William Lynn, he is one appointee amongst many, many. The exception does not dismantle the principle. Quite the opposite. Often it reinforces it. William Lynn happens to be in line with all the other Obama appointees — the best possible person for that position.

It’s good that you and others are underestimating President Obama. It gives him plenty of room to maneuver and continue doing what he promised to to do — what is best for this country.

If you keep shooting from the hip, Bernd, sooner or later, you will shoot yourself in the foot.

By: Robert Sat, 14 Feb 2009 22:13:31 +0000 It is interesting that as always we think that Masaia will change everything! sofar no Masaia has changed our lives and unless we understand it is the system not the person, we are going to face same problems regardless who the president is.
It seems humanity is not learning its lessons, at no time in history our elected ones represented us, they represent themselves, I have no idea when we are going to get that.
Washington and the world will change based on people’s understanding. Presidents will not and can not change Washington because they are part of Washington.

By: Spike Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:38:54 +0000 Some very good posts here Bernd and for once, this time your comment is less Anti-American. Perhaps because the “hated Bush” has gone.

Where there’s money there will be greed and corruption. But still further, all COLLECTIVE human activity, tends to get corrupted. For instance, start a political party to protect the interests, for example, of the poor, and the Party ends up being more important than the people they were elected to represent. The members of the Party even make millions out of it. Including BHO and HRC. Depressing, but true.

Only a system that includes all, as INDIVIDUALS? can prosper.

How can we set up something like this? Maybe the internet, as someone else has said, can help.

As Maggie Thatcher said, “There is no such thing as Society – only individuals who part of something bigger. I’m sure I have quoted that wrongly, but I believe that that was the gist of what she was saying.

By: Keshav Prasad Sat, 14 Feb 2009 15:39:06 +0000 Politicians enable money to multiply ; money enables politicians to qualify. No loser ; both winners. This is possible through lobbying. Who can eliminate LOBBY. Foolish.

By: Steve Sat, 14 Feb 2009 02:42:27 +0000 First off, think Term Limits for Congress.

Why? Because it gives them less time to be infected by lobbyists, and it gives interest groups less ROI on their investment should they successfully elect their candidate (hopefully enough to make them reconsider the effort & expense).

Another advantage is that it stops this nonsense of an entrenched Congress critter becoming the head of a important committee (e.g. Connecticut’s Dodd or MA Franks come to mind). With revolving representatives, there will be less hierarchy and more democracy (not necessarily a good thing… but the buying of Congress has proved so harmful that we HAVE to find alternatives).

We also need public financing of elections.
Candidates shouldn’t mortgage their souls to special interests to gain visibility initially.

All the above would do wonders to improve our lot.

Additional we need the media to step back up to the plate. You thoroughly deserted us during the Bush years!

As someone old enough to have lived through the Vietnam War years, I recall the important role the media played in the struggle to keep Gov responsible. Somehow the media went totally MIA in the buildup to the Iraq war.

Shame on you. Society needs your talents. We need a vibrant & questioning media & not this doormat for the status quo. Now the fact that a few Conglomerates have bought up the major media houses does come into play, (yet another reason for an independent Congress to watchguard our communal interests).

To summarize, things are thoroughly screwed up!
It seems the worst elements have risen to power.
All the more reason for the disenfranchised to reassert them(our)selves.

Yes… fight as though our lives depend on it;
because they probably do.